- (1.) The petitioner who was posted as a Nazir in the Court of Senior Subordinate Judge, Sangrur, was ordered to be removed from service by the District & Sessions Judge, Sangrur on March 3, 1988. He filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned single Judge of this Court vide order dated January 19, 1988. Aggrieved by the orders of removal from service and the dismissal of his appeal, the petitioner has approached this court through this writ petition. A few facts may be noticed.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed as an Inspection Clerk. On April 30, 1974, his services were terminated for want of vacancy. On the retirement of one Mr. Basant Lal, the petitioner was reappointed by the Distt. & Sessions Judge on purely temporary basis and posted as a copyist vide order dated May 22, 1974. In the year 1986, the petitioner was working as a Nazir in the Court of Senior Subordinate Judge, Sangrur. In February 1986, a charge-sheet dated January 30, 1986 was served on the petitioner. This was followed by another charge sheet dated February 27, 1986. The primary charge levelled against the petitioner in both the chargesheets related to his absence from duty. On February 28, 1986 the petitioner was placed under suspension. He submitted his reply. An enquiry was held. Ultimately, vide order dated December 15, 1986, the Senior Subordinate Judge, Sangrur ordered the petitioner to be 'dismissed' from service. He filed an appeal before the District & Sessions Judge. Finding that "the appellant was appointed by the District Judge, as a Copyist in the general line on 22.5.74...", it was held that the order passed by the Senior Subordinate Judge who was admittedly lower in rank to the appointing authority was not legal and valid and the order of dismissal was set aside. It was further observed that the case be remitted "to the Additional Senior Subordinate, Judge, Sangrur... with the directions that he should initiate the enquiry proceedings with regard to both the charge-sheets dated 30.1.1986 and 27.2.1986 respectively afresh and submit his report to me within two months from the date of receipt of this order." It was further observed that the suspension order dated 28.2.1986, issued by the Senior Sub Judge, of the appellant, shall be deemed to have continued in force from the date of original order of dismissal and shall remain in force until further orders
(3.) The proceedings were held de-novo. The enquiry officer found that the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved. The matter was then considered. A show cause notice was given to the petitioner. He submitted his reply on September 7, 1987. After considering the matter in detail, the learned District & Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide her order dated March 3, 1988 ordered the petitioner's removal from service. He filed an appeal against this order. It was placed for consideration before a learned Single Judge of this Court. Vide order dated July 19, 1988, the appeal was dismissed as "the official had not given any compelling circumstances justifying his absence from duty without prior sanction of the leave and the official has deliberately absented himself as is evident from the facts narrated..." Aggrieved by the order of his removal from service, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure P-20 with the writ petition as well as by the order by which the petitioner's appeal was dismissed, he has approached this Court through the present writ petition. The orders have been challenged primarily on the ground that the petitioner "ought to have been reinstated in service before lawful initiation of the fresh enquiry. Since the petitioner was not reinstated and paid full pay and allowances the impugned orders dated 3.3.1988 (Annexure P-20) passed by the respondent No. 1 and further the appellate order dated 19.7.1988 (Annexures P-24) passed by respondent No. 2 are wholly void and illegal and also violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India.";